ASUS CUV4X E DRIVER

I observed no glitches, and the system ran everything without hanging, or dropping to the desktop. When you are trying to find the correct settings for overclocking, the added boot time is very unwelcome. However, overclocking stability was very good with the CUV4X. All-in-all, the CUV4X is a very nice board. Unfortunately, even with a core voltage of 1. The only normal looking trace up there is the one labeled ‘reboot’, which I got after a warm reboot of the system.

Uploader: Dukus
Date Added: 15 April 2004
File Size: 57.38 Mb
Operating Systems: Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X
Downloads: 4556
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket 370, Intel (CUV4X-E/WOA) Motherboard

With the Celeron-2, the benchmark numbers were very stable, and almost no variation assus seen. I tried a flash update to the BIOS from version tobut this had no effect on the benchmark variation.

I tried ckv4x and lower core voltages, but the system refused to boot. I canceled the benchmark, went to Windows, and ran the Norton benchmark.

These are very significant performance variations that I could not account for. All overclock testing was done with a core voltage setting of 1. Below is a graph of the kind of result that made me curious in the first place.

CUV4X-E – ASUS Motherboards Mainboards Drivers Manuals BIOS

I then set the 3D Mark demo to a continuous loop, and left it running overnight. The system ran 3D Mark without a hitch.

How much of a speed boost do you get at to MHz? Finally, I put a new Celeron flip-chip in the system, and tested for variation in the Norton benchmark.

  MSI BK100 DRIVER DOWNLOAD

Pentium III overclock stability seemed better than Celeron-2 overclockability, but we did not have extra Celeron-2s around s test, so we can’t say for sure. The next step was to try MHz on the front side bus.

ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket , Intel (CUV4X-E/WOA) Motherboard | eBay

I just wanted to do a quick check and see what kind of system rating I would get with Norton Utilities You will also notice the dip in the dark blue line at the 4th test above. The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need to work on the board design some more. If you can put up with the slow boot times, the board will do a very good job of overclocking Pentium III processors.

System performance was substantially lower than with a comparably clocked Pentium III system, but as I mentioned earlier, the performance variability seen with the Pentium III was not seen with the Celeron I even tried a different power supply, also without effect on the variability. Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other programs e.

One thing that irritated me about the overclock settings was that they did d go in order in the BIOS menu, but rather, jumped all around, forcing you to scroll the long list to find the speed you wanted.

So that extra 20 seconds in the beginning carries through the entire boot process. The first thing I checked was if the system resources were declining. The chart below shows the Norton Benchmark variability at this speed. At MHz, that is probably acceptable assus.

  GEARHEAD MOBILE SLIM MAC DRIVER DOWNLOAD

Hardware museum

The initial setup included: The Athlon system running on a VIA chipset motherboard showed very little variability. Unfortunately, even with a core voltage of 1. That means when you turn the system on in cv4x morning, it will be almost 20 seconds before you can tell that it ckv4x responded!

However, overclocking stability was very good with the CUV4X. The Norton scores went from an average of aboutto an average of about The next thing I wanted to test was overclock stability, for which I used the newest version of 3D Mark version 1.

The most overclockable Pentium IIIs are the E and E models, asua often will run at MHz on the front side bus, if the motherboard and memory can handle it too.

The system benchmarks did not increase when going from MHz to MHz on f bus frequency, probably because the memory speed had to be reduced. By simply repeating the Norton benchmark over and over, I got wide variations from one test to another.